The proper Psalms at Mass

[JRRTFAN]

It’s my understanding that the Psalms known as The “Revised Psalms” published in the current New American Bible (Not to be confused with the New American Bible Revised Edition which is just now coming out) have been found unacceptable for liturgical use by the Vatican. Therefore the version we use at Mass is other than the the current NAB.

Given that degree of Vatican oversight in our current Missal, is it licit for a parish to substitute the various Psalm adaptations of Haugen, Shutte and others, found in such modern (post 70s) volumes as the “Gather” hymnal, for the actual chanting of the Psalms found in the Missal?

It seems to me if this change is valid then reading another version of the Bible in lieu of that in the Missal would be equally as valid.

 

[MarkThompson]

It’s my understanding that the Psalms known as The “Revised Psalms” published in the current New American Bible (Not to be confused with the New American Bible Revised Edition which is just now coming out) have been found unacceptable for liturgical use by the Vatican. Therefore the version we use at Mass is other than the the current NAB.

Given that degree of Vatican oversight in our current Missal, is it licit for a parish to substitute the various Psalm adaptations of Haugen, Shutte and others, found in such modern (post 70s) volumes as the “Gather” hymnal, for the actual chanting of the Psalms found in the Missal?

This was recently discussed in this thread (I’m linking to my own post).

It seems to me if this change is valid then reading another version of the Bible in lieu of that in the Missal would be equally as valid.

According to the USCCB, for the United States:
3. Is the New American Bible the only translation of Scriptures we can read from at Mass?

Since May 19, 2002, the revised Lectionary, based on the New American Bible is the only English-language Lectionary that may be used at Mass in the dioceses of the United States, except for the current Lectionary for Masses with Children which remains in use.

The 1970 edition of the New American Bible is used in the Scripture readings and canticles of the Liturgy of the Hours (except the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc dimittis.)

 

[puzzleannie]

It’s
Given that degree of Vatican oversight in our current Missal, is it licit for a parish to substitute the various Psalm adaptations of Haugen, Shutte and others, found in such modern (post 70s) volumes as the “Gather” hymnal, for the actual chanting of the Psalms found in the Missal?

It seems to me if this change is valid then reading another version of the Bible in lieu of that in the Missal would be equally as valid.

no they may not be used unless the words are those of the psalm translation approved for liturgy. That version was not chosen on a whim. they are not just “another version” they are approved for liturgical use. Those other songs can be used as hymns, but cannot replace the responsorial psalm.

 

[Samuel63]

Indeed, the music by Haugen or anyone else, whether from the Gather hymnal or any music book, is not appropriate as the psalm.

This form of liturgical abuse is rampant. Our current pope is keen to it as well. He stated in the past year or two that we deserve and have a right to a proper mass.

I encourage you to take factual notes like a detective and write to the pastor, then to the bishop, then to the Congregation of The Doctrine of The Faith. You can find their address on www.vatican.va.

I have written them before and they are helpful. Oh, here is their address directly: cdf@cfaith.va.

 

[JRRTFAN]

This was recently discussed in this thread (I’m linking to my own post).

According to the USCCB, for the United States:
3. Is the New American Bible the only translation of Scriptures we can read from at Mass?

Since May 19, 2002, the revised Lectionary, based on the New American Bible is the only English-language Lectionary that may be used at Mass in the dioceses of the United States, except for the current Lectionary for Masses with Children which remains in use.

The 1970 edition of the New American Bible is used in the Scripture readings and canticles of the Liturgy of the Hours (except the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc dimittis.)

Is this, then, a baptism of the Haugen-Shutte iterations of the Psalms as superceding those of the prohibited Revised Psalms of the NAB? Frankly, I’d rather live with whatever innerencies lie in the RS rather than an interpretation by these fellas, of course I have no authority one way or another.

 

[JRRTFAN]

Indeed, the music by Haugen or anyone else, whether from the Gather hymnal or any music book, is not appropriate as the psalm.

This form of liturgical abuse is rampant. Our current pope is keen to it as well. He stated in the past year or two that we deserve and have a right to a proper mass.

I encourage you to take factual notes like a detective and write to the pastor, then to the bishop, then to the Congregation of The Doctrine of The Faith. You can find their address on www.vatican.va.

I have written them before and they are helpful. Oh, here is their address directly: cdf@cfaith.va.
[/QUOTE]
Marty is a member of the United Church of Christ, which, more power to him, is not the one Church. WhenI i was a pup they wouldn’t sing " A Mighty Fortress" due to its Marty Luther roots!

 

[JRRTFAN]

no they may not be used unless the words are those of the psalm translation approved for liturgy. That version was not chosen on a whim. they are not just “another version” they are approved for liturgical use. Those other songs can be used as hymns, but cannot replace the responsorial psalm.

You should come to my parish!!

 

[MarkThompson]

Is this, then, a baptism of the Haugen-Shutte iterations of the Psalms as superceding those of the prohibited Revised Psalms of the NAB? Frankly, I’d rather live with whatever innerencies lie in the RS rather than an interpretation by these fellas, of course I have no authority one way or another.

I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking here, but it’s not a question of supersedence. Rather, various options are permitted when the Psalm is sung (though not when it is recited), while no options are permitted with respect to the readings.

 

[JRRTFAN]

I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking here, but it’s not a question of supersedence. Rather, various options are permitted when the Psalm is sung (though not when it is recited), while no options are permitted with respect to the readings.

My point is to ask (name removed by moderator)ut on concept. In other words, let’s say the Psalm of the day is the 23d. Is it permissable to substitute “Shepard Me O God” for the Psalm in the Missal? This is not singing the Psalm, it is singing a song derived from the Psalm. Is such permissable? If so, why can’t the readings be taken from The Living Bible rather than from the Missal?

 

[agapewolf]

We are actually in transition right now…

While the text in the lectionary can be used, any new psalms written are supposed to be written from the Psalter by the Benedictine Monks of Conception Abbey. This new translation was approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on November 11, 2008, and was granted a recognitio by the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments on April 9, 2010.

So both are ok right now.

 

[MarkThompson]

My point is to ask (name removed by moderator)ut on concept. In other words, let’s say the Psalm of the day is the 23d. Is it permissable to substitute “Shepard Me O God” for the Psalm in the Missal? This is not singing the Psalm, it is singing a song derived from the Psalm. Is such permissable?

If it were approved as part of a “collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form,” then yes. I don’t think Shepherd Me, O God is so approved, and in fact the GIRM states, “Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.”

If so, why can’t the readings be taken from The Living Bible rather than from the Missal?

Because it is not permitted to give the readings except as they appear in the Lectionary for Mass.